Skip to content

R0007/2026-03-20/C001 — Claim Definition

Claim as Received

O'Boyle and Aguinis (2012) studied five studies, 198 samples, 633,263 individuals across researchers, entertainers, politicians, and athletes and found individual performance follows a power-law distribution, not a normal distribution. The top decile produces roughly 30% of total output; the top quartile produces over 50%.

Claim as Clarified

This is a compound claim with two parts: (1) the study's scope and methodology (five studies, 198 samples, 633,263 individuals across four occupational categories) and its primary finding (power-law distribution over normal distribution), and (2) specific quantitative assertions about output concentration (top 10% producing ~30% of output; top 25% producing >50%). The first part concerns verifiable bibliographic facts. The second part concerns specific statistical findings that should appear in the paper.

BLUF

The study details (five studies, 198 samples, 633,263 individuals, four occupational groups, power-law finding) are confirmed by the published paper. The top-decile and top-quartile output percentages are consistent with Paretian distributions but represent approximate characterizations rather than exact figures reported uniformly in the paper.

Scope

  • Domain: Organizational psychology, individual performance distributions
  • Timeframe: 2012 publication, data spanning multiple decades
  • Testability: Verifiable against the published paper in Personnel Psychology 65(1): 79-119

Assessment Summary

Probability: Very likely (80-95%)

Confidence: High

Hypothesis outcome: H2 (partially correct) prevails. The study parameters and power-law finding are confirmed. The output concentration percentages are reasonable approximations consistent with Paretian distributions but are not precise quotations from the paper.

[Full assessment in assessment.md.]

Status

Field Value
Date created 2026-03-20
Date completed 2026-03-20
Researcher profile Not provided
Prompt version claim v1.0-draft
Revisit by 2027-03-20
Revisit trigger If the paper is retracted or if subsequent meta-analyses substantially revise the power-law finding